art. He stigmatizes the Calvinistic atonement in this manner. "In fact, this doctrine undermines the divinity of Christ, as much as Socinianism, inasmuch as it makes a separation be tween the views and character of the Father and those of the Son."-P. 120. On the Patripassian system of atonement, Mr. Erskine is enabled to eulogize it without measure, as implying, in one sense, the unutterable love of the Deity, and not the unutterable malignity which sticks closely and inevitably to his character, according to every Calvinistic scheme. This love he describes thus, (p. 104,) "What a wonderful and awful and enlivening subject of contemplation is this! God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son"-that. part of himself which assumed the manhood. "And the same God sent forth this Son" this manhood. "This is the God with whom we have to do. This is his character, the just God, and yet the Saviour. There is an augustness and a tenderness about this act, a depth and height, and breadth and length of moral worth and sanctity, which defies equally the full grasp of thought and language." Might not the Jesuit, whom I before introduced, adopt this pathetic language with as much propriety and effect, when he dwells on the continued and excessive humiliation of a third part of his God? A very small additional portion of faith would enable Mr. Erskine to join, in ecstatic himself, in order to atone to himself for the sins of men? How are we to account for the fact, that a man of talent and learning should maintain, in a civilized society, that the Omnipotent, Omniscient Creator of all worlds, and of all beings, should be reduced to the necessity of becoming a man, and dying upon a cross, before he could forgive any one individual man, and before he could induce any rational creature to hate sin? There is in these notions a depth and height, and breadth and length of absurdity, which defies the power of language. The remainder of his book contains not much clearer elucidation of his atonement; but the whole is contrived with great ability, and a studied obscurity to sooth the prejudices of Calvinists, to enlist them on his side, and even to persuade them that he coincides with their ideas, when he discourses in rhapsodies on the character of God, and the wonderful effect which his unutterable love must produce on the hearts and lives of men. We cannot but regret that a man of his talents and acquirements, with so much devout feeling, should be driven blindly from one frightful extreme, respecting the character of God, to an opposite extreme no less monstrous, and to advocate a cause which would tend to bring revealed religion into contempt. SIR, S. Yeovil, March 12, 1823. AVING seen the statement of delight, with those who worship the HMr. Adam in "The Unitarian Deity in the form of a beast. As he has taken good care not "to analyze the component parts of the Christian scheme of doctrine," which he says is the object of his Dissertation, we cannot, therefore, certainly decide, that he makes his atonement to operate so partially, as to imply the doctrines of unconditional election and reprobation. But, though we should acquit him from representing the Deity as capricious, unjust and malignant, still there is an extravagance of folly in his notion of atonement, which no sane mind can endure for a moment. What man in his senses can believe that the infinite and sole God of the universe has degraded himself upon this earth, and punished Fund Register, No. I.," attached to your last Number, I cannot fail (in common with every lover of truth) to rejoice in the prospect of the spread of Unitarianism in India. Connecting with it the accounts which have reached this country before, there seems little doubt of the ultimate success of a well-digested plan, since our brethren at Calcutta have succeeded in effecting so much. The impression already made on the Jaggernaut establishment, by that mighty engine which is sapping the foundations of the Holy Alliance in Europe, and the very citadel of religious tyranny in India, shews what might be done by men who can offer a system of faith, at which reason does not revolt, in lieu of ancient superstition; and not the exchange of one absurd system for another, which is also unreasonable. On the whole, it must be confessed that the proposal of Mr. A. is of too much importance to share the fate of a thousand others which strike the eye for the moment, but are soon abandoned. It cannot be put in execution without expense; and that in the aggregate a very formidable one; but it appears to me that there can be nothing further necessary than the same portion of zeal as others discover in the furtherance of missionary esta blishments, which they seem to be labouring for with comparatively little success and little fruit. I have no data to assist me in an estimate of the Unitarian part of the population in this country, but suppose they cannot be overrated at 20,000. A subscription of one penny per week from each of whom would raise a sum of 43361. 6s. 8d. annually. If it be supposed too much to average one penny per week from this number, which, considering the wealth and consequence in society of a large proportion of them, I am sanguine enough to think is not; the subscription of one half or two-thirds would surely be sufficient to effect a vast deal. I believe there are some who are at this time, from the wish to promote such a cause in any shape, subscribing to the Church and other Missionary Societies, who would gladly pay their money to a more congenial establishment; and I have no doubt, but that there are others who have withdrawn from the Society, originally founded on the principle of sending forth the Bible to the world without note or comment, but who have found the tone of that institution so altered as to dissatisfy them, would become suscribers to a Unitarian Mission in India. These loose hints it is my object to suggest, in order that they may be improved upon by more competent persons. SIR, D. H. March 15, 1823. ISE, with great pleasure, that it is the intention of the Deputies at length to bring forward the great question of the Repeal of the Corpo ration and Test Aets, and I cannot help thinking that the Dissenters are. chargeable with indolence and indifference to the cause of Religious Liberty, in having so long neglected to assert their claim to a participation in the rights and privileges at present monopolized by the sect endowed by law, or only conceded to them as a favour. Many, if not most of those who distinguished themselves as the advocates of our rights, are dead, and a generation has arisen, to many of whom the agitation of this question will, I fear, appear rather like an attempt to revive an obsolete and needless dispute, than an assertion of a just claim. It has been suffered to sleep too long-much too long. We shall be asked, If any inconvenience had been felt from these laws, why have the Dissenters ceased for so long a period to urge their repeal? Why for thirty years have they been silent and acquiescent? And I confess I see not what satisfactory answer can be given to these questions. However, it is useless now to indulge in these regrets. Let us atone for our former indifference and negligence by our future zeal and activity. Above all, let us take the ground we ought to take. Not that of cringing, abject suppliants, begging for a boon, intriguing and negociating with ministers and jacks in office for their permission to smuggle a small quantity of toleration through the Houses of Parliament, or begging the bench of Reverend Fathers in God that they will take compassion on our forlorn state, and for once admit that in some cases, with certain limitations, with a number of provisoes and reservations, and guards and restrictions, such of their fellow-Christians as have the misfortune to dissent from them in matters of faith, may be permitted to feel that they are their fellow-citizens. To this state of degradation I trust the Dissenters will not expose themselves. Let them demand. their rights in the language which men ought to use, who know their value, and who feel that the Legislature has a long arrear of injustice and oppression to settle with them. Above all, let there be no caut about the clergy and the Establishment. We believe the latter to be an unscriptural institution, and we ought not, for the whenever the subject comes before the Legislature and the public, must be productive of good, and the final success of the cause of religious liberty will be certain. SIR, A NONCONFORMIST. October 30, 1822. Magazine having published an HE Editors of the Evangelical sake of any advantage, to belie our consciences, but are bound, on the contrary, to bear our testimony against it. And we shall very much deceive ourselves if we think by cringing and fawning to the clergy to coax them into an acknowledgement of our claims. Like the image-makers of Ephesus, as soon as the dissenting teacher Paul began to preach, they would make our application to Parliament a signal for setting up a hue and cry against us. They look upon religion as a craft-a trade, by "which they have their wealth," and any thing which would tend to the advantage of those who do not belong to their sect, they will consider as tending to bring their "craft into danger." They have been not unaptly described as "a sable society of gentlemen, wearing broad hats and deep garments, who possess great part of the wealth and power of the world for keeping mankind in decent ignorance and bondage." In saying what I have done of the clergy, I trust I shall not be thought to have spoken harshly, or to have used language which is not fairly authorized by their ablest and most recent advocates. For upon what ground did Mr. Plunkett and Mr. Peel reply to Mr. Hume's statement of the laziness and inefficiency of the clergy in Ireland? Not on that of having earned their wages by their work. The whole of their arguments were very properly stated to amount to this-that church is church, and property is property. It was treated entirely as a matter of trade, and when the clergy are told that they do nothing for what they receive, they do not deny it, but forthwith a clamour is raised about "vested interests." This trade, then, it is clear, they will defend pedibus et unguibus, and it is idle to expect favour or forbearance from them. They will use every engine to defeat our claims. Let them. We shall, nevertheless, succeed in the end. True it is that we shall be defeated in our first endeavour, and most probably in our second and third. But that is no reason for inactivity or despair. The discussion which must arise, article in their number for June, under the head of "Unitarian Views of Christian Missions," containing what I consider uncandid and unjustifiable Strictures on the Cursory Remarks on Borneo, which you honoured me by publishing in the Monthly Repository, (Vol. XVII. pp. 13 and 98,) I addressed an explanatory communication thereon to the aforesaid Editors, and requested its insertion on what I deem a fair claim, viz. that the defence should be admitted into the same work which published the attack: but it seems I gave more credit for candour in this instance than could be accepted by the parties, for the Editors state in their notices to Correspondents for last month, "Our sentiments on Christian doctrine differ so widely from those of J. C. R. that he must excuse our inserting his remarks." Now, I might at this point leave the Christian candour of such a mode of procedure to the judgment of every honest man who dares to think for himself; but I cannot help observing, that these Trinitarian leaders had much better let us alone, than in this manner shew to their thinking and inquiring disciples (however small the numbers of those may be), that they cannot use the words of our Lord and his apostles without note or comment, and so repeat or quote the following or similar passages:"Search the Scriptures ;" "Call no man master (in spiritual things) on earth, for one is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren;" Prove all things, hold fast that which is good;" "Be always ready to give a reason for the hope that is in you;" "And these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, searching the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so." By bring Apology for the Danger of the Church, ing up an evil report of Unitarianism, 1719. they endeavour to deter their disciples from proceeding to investigate it for themselves; knowing that if they were to act impartially, and exhibit to their congregations and readers such fair comparative statements of their and our respective doctrines, as are exhibited to ours, truth would have fair play, and must then certainly prevail. Whensoever they publish to their readers an Unitarian's account of his conversion from Trinitarianism in so fearless a manner as has been done by you in Mr. Harwood's case, (Mon. Repos. XV. 388 and XVII. 327,) then I shall imbibe a better opinion of the firmness of their belief in the truth of their own doctrines than I now enter tain. Indeed, I am now more than ever convinced that those Trinitarian rulers not only dare not direct their readers to the perusal of any Unitarian publications, but, on the contrary, must, for the sake of their systems, act by such publications according to the mode in which the Pope and his Church have acted towards the Bible and its distributors. I freely admit that the Cursory Remarks were too hastily written, and expressed in stronger language than I should have deemed proper to use, if at the time I had entertained any idea of their being likely to meet the public eye; but although incautiously drawn up, I do not allow that they are inaccurate on any essential point. I am, indeed, sorry that they have afforded a handle for the very uncandid attack on the Unitarians at large, which I am now exposing. But I have the consolation to believe that Unitarians are not only accustomed to such illiberal and unjust attacks, but that they also do and will consider the Remarks in no other light than as those of an obscure individual, whose zeal is perhaps greater than his learning, and not as in any way binding on any other person; which, also, all well-informed Trinitarians know to be the case with us, how much soever it may suit the views of the bigots among their party, who cannot divest their minds of their preconceived ideas of the necessity of definite creeds, or of ignorant persons who take up their notions of Unitarianism from its enemies at second hand, or of concealed infidels who strive to misrepresent and calumniate pure Christianity in order to serve their own particular purposes, to represent to their deluded and unsuspecting followers, that whatever obnoxious opinions any solitary individual among Unitarians may think fit to avow, is really the creed of the whole. Returning to the Editors of the soi-disant Evangelical Magazine, I must repeat, that they are bound, in honour and justice, to admit into that work temperate defences of any party on whom they have previously inserted an attack. Their sentiments, if truly evangelical, should lead them either to reject every thing controversial or having a tendency thereto, or else to allow both sides a fair hearing. Since, however, they have not done either the one or the other, and refuse to do it, I must beg of you to insert the following copy of the paper sent to them by me, to the end that the Unitarian Christian public may judge between us. J. C. ROSS. "To the Editors of the Evangelical Magazine. "I find in your Number for June a communication headed, 'On Unitarian Views of Christian Missions,' signed Humanus, and containing observations and strictures on a paper written by me, and inserted in the Monthly Repository, under the title of Cursory Remarks on Bornéo.' Believing that Humanus has misunderstood and mistaken the meaning of some of my statements, and, perhaps, in consequence of such misunderstanding been, in my humble opinion, rather illiberal in his observations and strictures thereon, I now appeal to your candour and justice in requesting your insertion of the following explanations in my own and my fellow-Christians' defence and vindication. 1. When I used the expression, to follow the example of St. Paul, I had in my mind the ninth and tenth chapters of his first Epistle to the Corinthians, and, in particular, the 21st and 22d verses of the ninth chapter, and the 29th verse of the tenth chapter; and I must confess myself unable to comprehend the scope and design of the apostle's argument therein, if it be not that of maintaining the sinless nature of compliance with the Constantine's sword of steel.' It is also, I presume, well known to all Protestants that the foundations were then deeply laid of that horrible structure of tyrannical superstition and idolatry, from which, under the title of Church of Rome, those doctrines and mandates were issued, which imposed on the credulity of mankind, and kept them fettered in the chains of ignorance and mental darkness during so many ages, even until the good providence of God directed the invention of printing as the appointed means for rescuing and relieving them from spiritual bondage. 4. I am very reluctantly led to suppose that Humanus is not sufficiently well informed respecting the tenets held by Unitarian Christians, if he mean to designate them under the appellation,Modern Socinians.' The Unitarians disclaim persecution under any and every shape. Socinus persecuted Davides for refusing to worship Christ, which fact alone ought in every honest mind to be admitted as decisive testimony to the inconvertibility of the terms. It is neither just nor politic in a Protestant writer to assert that Christians who acknowledge the truth and divine authority of the Bible, and particularly the New Testament, allow only harmless customs of men among whom we may sojourn; and I am confident that compliance with such customs will not be construed by the people alluded to, nor any others, as indicating an approval of it, or as forming a tacit guarantee for its continuance among them in the event of their becoming Christians. St. Paul says, All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: this sentence is the best explanation I can wish to give of the principle on which I distinguished between propriety and expediency; and I trust Humanus has a more just conception of the holy religion which he professes, than to think the employment of carping verbal criticism on such subjects can be at all consistent therewith. Moreover, the phrase, drinking human blood,' appears much stronger than the circumstances of the case, as stated by me, will fairly warrant; a single drop of blood put into a draught of palm wine, being in truth nothing more than a literal or visible sign of their uniting the stranger to their blood or race. 2. It rather appears inconsistent with Christian candour to think so much evil of our neighbour as to characterize any ceremony of his as idolatrous, which has no reference to any idol, and more especially among aa minute fragment of Christianity. people who do not worship idols, at least in the common acceptation of the term; and I do aver, on my own knowledge, that the invocations used at the ceremony in question were directed to the Supreme (though by them unknown) God. I did not expect to be understood as meaning that I believed any part of St. Paul's writings implied the lawfulness of worshiping idols;' nor do I think that any expression I used can be brought forward to make out the relevancy of the paragraph (from which I have taken the above-quoted sentence) to any thing contained in the Remarks. 3. Humanus either grossly mistakes my meaning, or otherwise confounds the establishment of Christianity with the promulgation thereof, two periods which, in my opinion, were very dissimilar indeed, and the former is very justly described in the Evangelical Magazine, as having been brought about, Not by the apostolic sword of the Spirit, but by the Emperor Such statements are evidently prejudicial to Christianity in general, and to Protestantism in particular; and since in the way of interpretation, it is, or at least ought to be, acknowledged that we all have need to exert our best abilities when endeavouring to find the true direction, we ought not to expend those abilities in mischievous quarrels with each other by the way. Humanus ought not to be ignorant of that which we all know, or at least those of us who have had opportunity of attending to or observing on missionary affairs in Mahommedan countries particularly, and Heathen countries generally, viz. that the doctrine of the Trinity and its concomitants are the principal impediments to the conversion of the inhabitants, and that putting out of view the question of their importance, and of their truth or falsehood, it deserves serious consideration whether it be not certain that the apostles did not begin their teaching or preaching by plainly and unequivo |